Advice To A Young Scientist

by Peter Medawar

To those interested in a life in science, Sir Peter Medawar, Nobel laureate, deflates the myths of invincibility, superiority, and genius; instead, he demonstrates it is common sense and an inquiring mind that are essential to the scientist's calling. He deflates the myths surrounding scientists -- invincibility, superiority, and genius; instead, he argues that it is common sense and an inquiring mind that are essential to the makeup of a scientist. He delivers many wry observations on how to choose a research topic, how to get along wih collaborators and older scientists and administrators, how (and how not) to present a scientific paper, and how to cope with culturally "superior" specialists in the arts and humanities.

Genres: Science, Nonfiction, Philosophy, Medicine, Research, Popular Science, Biology

128 pages, Paperback

First published January 1, 1979

Reviews

[Howard · Rating 5 out of 5]

Medawar is one of a handful of classics on my science communication book shelf.

It is eloquently written and delves into many of the challenges of producing scientific knowledge for the public. Anyone with a science degree from university embarking on a career in research would benefit from Medawar's advice. If you are involved in science and you have not read it, I recommend it. Each time you open it and reread, some new insights are sparked off.

Lately it provoked me to ponder the relationship between the old testament scriptures of the bible and utopias of scientific progress that scientists aspire to create. In societies in religious decline, the morality of scientists practicing science needs ethical oversight, to ensure that science is not used politically by members of society for dystopic ends.

[Mehmet]

Nispeten genel geçer, yüzeysel tavsiyelerden oluşan kitabın kendisine fazla yorumum yok. Benim yorumum yayıncılıktan, editörlükten ve çeviriden bahsedecek.
Öncelikle "Bilimadamı" ifadesi neden var? Kitabın gerek anadilinden baskısında gerekse de içeriğinde böyle cinsiyetçi bir ifade geçmezken Tübitak bunu neden tercih etmiş akıl alır şey değil. Çevirmen seçmiş desek, çevirmen bir kadın ve kitabın içeriğinde tüm biliminsanı kelimelerini "bilimci" olarak çevirmiş. Oysa TÜBİTAK kitabın ismini "Bilimadamı" olarak seçme lütfunda bulunmuş!

İkinci eleştirim, kitaptaki çeviri ve editörlüğe. Hemen her sayfada "herşey" ve "birşey" gibi kelimelerin birleşik yazılmasını geçtim, "kangren" kelimesini açıp da tdk'ya bakmadan halk ağzındaki (ve anadili olan İngilizcedeki gibi) gangren olarak çeviren bir çevirmen beni çok da şaşırtmadı. Kitabın tamamı Türkçe hatalarıyla dolu.

Kısacası, okumasanız da "olur" bir kitap olmuş bu.

[Aniket Samant · Rating 4 out of 5]

A really nice and short read for anyone wanting to be reassured that a path of scientific exploration is a worthy one whether they're formally scientists or not. Maybe the case for scientific meliorism is too idealistic but the author makes some crisp and compelling arguments for the general nature of truth-seeking. The book is also filled with several witty and profound epigrams and is quite inspiring to read - especially coming from a Nobel laureate - and the humility of the author is quite evident throughout the text. Definitely recommended for anyone who's driven by a strong sense of curiosity!

[Zainab · Rating 4 out of 5]

I highly recommend this to anyone starting out in research science or is thinking of research as a career.

[Ashwin · Rating 5 out of 5]

Advice To A Young Scientist is a book by P. B. Medawar for folks keen on entering research. Medawar won the Nobel Prize for Medicine in 1960 for his research on why immune systems reject organ transplants. Medawar's writing is meticulous and a joy to read. Though the former half of the book deals with practical information for the newbie, the latter turns into a treatise on science and the scientific method. Not bad reading at all.

[Serdar Tutal · Rating 3 out of 5]

Kitap değil de yazarın alıntıları güzel. Çoğu tavsiye sanki çok daha önceden kişinin kendi kendine kavrayabileceği şeyler.

[Bruno Ramírez · Rating 5 out of 5]

Consejos vocacionales, prácticos, filosóficos y de vida. Sin duda un libro al que regresaré en cada etapa de mi carrera, próximamente cuando sea un "joven científico" de doctorado y no un "niño científico" de licenciatura.

Además de los consejos prácticos acerca de metodologías de investigación, redacción y experimentación, me llevo este gran consejo:

La ciencia, a diferencia de lo que se cree comúnmente, es una empresa sumamente creativa e imaginativa. El proceso hipotético-deductivo de la investigación nace no sólo de la observación sino de la capacidad del individuo de imaginar una explicación. Las hipótesis, piedras angulares de la ciencia, son el producto de nuestra imaginación. Es por esto que de hoy en adelante haré lo posible por cultivar mi imaginación para convertirme en mejor científico.

[Goh Jiayin · Rating 5 out of 5]

"The belief of Comenius that the pursuit of universal learning "to be acquired and applied to the benefit of all men for the common good" is truly via lucis, the way of light." Medawar

This book really gives great encouragement and enlightens his readers on the perks of being a scientist. Honestly, Medawar brings back the interest I have for science where creativity and imagination is one of the few essential things needed. Although it is a little hard to read in terms of the vocabulary used, it really feels as if he is talking and advising to you rather than giving a lecture or just reading.

[Ian · Rating 4 out of 5]

Accessible and down-to-Earth. All the more so when you consider that it is written by a Noble Prize Laureate. As his background is fundamental research, scientific researchers may get more out of this book. Though it is definitely worth the read for any branch of science. Based on a career spanning several decades Peter Medawar amicably shares insights into areas from the choice of research topics and careers, showing respect to older colleagues and collaborators, to the limits of the scientific method.

[Daniel · Rating 3 out of 5]

Una buena cantidad de los consejos son oportunos y vigentes para los aspirantes a científicos, al mismo tiempo anima y amplía el panorama los estudiantes de carreras científicas. Si bien algunos consejos no están "tan actualizados", es una lectura recomendada para el joven aspirante a científico.

[Burcu Bölükbaş · Rating 3 out of 5]

kapsamlı olsun derken bahsedilen konular çok yüzeysel anlatılmış sanki. bazı bölümleri (örn; bilimci veya daha iyi bir bilimci olmak için kendimi nasıl hazırlayabilirim?) daha fazla açması şahane olurdu. ama yine de nobel ödüllü bir bilim adamının şahsi fikirlerini okumak zevkliydi.

[Coral Ivashkov · Rating 3 out of 5]

2.5 stars actually.

[Acadia · Rating 3 out of 5]

The author gives his thoughts on all aspects of practicing science - choosing research questions, designing research, writing papers, giving talks, etc. This was all rather straightforward. I imagine some sections would have been more bold and impressive in 1979 when the book was published; for example the extensive section expounding against sexism and racism in science. But overall nothing has really stuck with me or made me see particular aspects of science in a new light.
The final chapters were more interesting, as they dealt with the scientific process in a philosophical sense, and the history of thought on it (e.g. Aristotle, Bacon, Kuhn). Also explored is the role of scientists in society.
Ultimately I’m glad I read this but am giving it 3 stars because I wouldn’t really recommend it. It has inspired me to read a more complete text on philosophy/history of science at some point.

[Chelsi · Rating 2 out of 5]

Our lab decided to read this book together during the pandemic. It was informative in the sense that it described in writing much of the "unwritten rules" of science (don't go to graduate school where you went to undergrad, never use the word "prove," etc.). There were portions of the book I liked and other times where I thought Medawar went a little off the beaten path into his random opinions. He definitely wrote as if he did not take himself too seriously. In all, for someone who did science in the mid 1900s, he seems like a pretty forward-thinking person and I imagine he was a kind person.

[Lakmus · Rating 3 out of 5]

(A witty collection of mostly useful) advice to a young scientist (that may or may not still be relevant).
I don't personally know if many people starting out research careers today have quite the ambitions of young scientists addressed by Medawar, I feel people these days might be a little less naive and arrogant, but I still had a few of my own questions answered. Plus, Medawar's writing is worth reading in and of itself, and the occasional roast and burn are quite on point.

[Bassel E. Helal · Rating 4 out of 5]

Richard Dawkins once described Peter B. Medawar as being "the wittiest of all scientific writers", and no denying that he definitely stands as one of the few modern scientists deeply indulged in the philosophical implications of their line of work. I was no less delighted to find out by chance that he left behind a guide targeted towards students of science, to guide them through the fallacies and difficulties on matters of philosophy of science, proper morals & mannerisms, social life, as well as regarding the processes of science itself, from giving a proper presentation, all the way to winning the Noble Prize (he recieved the Noble Prize in 1960), from his years of experience in the field supplemented with personal examples of successes and blunders. As a student myself, I found this particularily valuable, especially when some unfortunate reality rang true more than four decades later:

It is far otherwise nowadays when the apprenticeship is almost the invariable rule; today, a young hopeful attaches himself as a graduate student to some senior scientist and hopes to learn his trade and be rewarded by a master's degree or doctorate in philosophy as evidence that he has done so.

Medawar was one of the few male scientists in his day who was openly supportive of the suffrage of women in science, taking a rationalist, and rather humane, approach to the matter, something deserving of mention.

The case for rejoicing in the increasing number of women who enter the learned professions has nothing primarily to do with providing them with gainful employment or giving them an opportunity to develop their full potential. It is above all due to the fact that the world is now such a complicated and repidly changing place that it cannot even be kept going (let alone improved, as we melorists think it can be) without using the intelligence and skill of approximately 50 percent of the human race.

Throughout the book, Medawar gives valuable pieces of moral advice, which I sincerely wish to see my classmates follow for they would cure the many ailments that plague the gullible mind of the immature scientist seeking to secure a place in the field.

Secretiveness in a scientist is a disfigurement, to be sure, but it has its comic side; one of the most comically endearing traits of a young research worker is the illusion that everyone else is eager to hurry off to do his research before he can. A scientist who is too cagey or suspicious to tell his colleagues anything will soon find out that he himself will learn nothing in return.

[Sahit · Rating 3 out of 5]

Overall decent read! Had many bits that dragged and/or felt kind of dull, but the beginning and end of the book felt particularly engaging - even if I didn't agree with everything the author said. Medawar is clearly well read and is speaking from a wealth of professional experience.

There's a section in chapter 11 (on the scientific method), where Medawar expounds on the importance of experimentation over the collection of/reading of relevant literature (at least, this is how I interpreted it). This caught my interest as it stands partially against a book I read earlier this year - "How to Solve it", by George Polya. Whereas Polya emphasizes the importance of understanding related work and theories in order to make progress in your investigation, Medawar argues "No new truth will declare itself from inside a heap of facts ... the day-to-day business of science consists not in hunting for facts but in testing hypotheses". Medawar was a biologist who was awarded a Nobel Prize for their pioneering work on organ transplantation whereas Polya was a mathematician with contributions to e.g combinatorics. While their opinions are not fully incongruous with each other, I'm curious about the middle ground of these opinions for fields like robotics - which feels like equal parts scratching my head in front of a whiteboard and scratching my head in front of a table with a robot bolted to it.

Medawar also discusses his disagreements with Kuhn's "Structure of Scientific Revolutions" on the grounds that revolutions are less discrete than Kuhn makes them about to be and are rather continual and quite personalized to each scientist. I should probably give that book a read eventually although I'm inclined to agree with Medawar. He also discusses general disagreements with C.S Lewis and his Arcadian visions (a passage I really liked in Chapter 12), which makes me want to read more Lewis (even if I'm again closer to Medawar than Lewis).

Sharing some quotes here I liked from the book:
"In choosing topics for research...a young scientist must beware of following fashion. It is one thing to fall into step with a great concerted movement of thought...but quite another to fall in with prevailing fashion."

"If people do sleep during their lectures, speakers should try to get some comfort from the thought that no sleep is so deeply refreshing as that which, during lectures, Morpheus invites us so insistently to enjoy."

[Seda Muradoglu · Rating 4 out of 5]

Organ nakli konusunda yaptığı çalışmalarla Nobel ödülü alan Prof. Dr. Medawar'ın kitabını okumak isteyip de üşenenlere önemli bulduğum alıntılar ile özetlemek isterim ..
- Bilimcilerin ortak zayıf tarafı, bir hipoteze aşık olup, hayır yanıtını kabullenememektir. Çok sevilen bu hipotezle yaşanan aşk değerli yılların ziyan olması ile sonuçlanır.
- Kütüphanecilerin yer sorunu nedeniyle kullanılmayan maden ocaklarında depoladıkları çok çok eski yayınlara referans yapmak.
- Bir tebliğ Hiçbir Şekilde yazılı metinden okunarak sunulmamalıdır!
- Bir hipotezin doğru olduğu kanısının çok güçlü olması onun doğruluğunun göstergesi değildir.
- Bilimcinin günlük işi bilgi toplamak değil, teori sınamaktır!
-Bilimde şovenizme yer yoktur.. Descartes ; İnsanların sahip olduğu yetiler içinde en hakça dağıtılmış olan şey sağduyudur.. (Yahudi disiplini, Alman Kimyası ve elitist Royal Society of London temaların atıfta bulunulmuş ancak bir miktar doğruluklarına da değinilmiş)
- Bir kimseyi bilimsel araştırma yapmaya iten neden ne olursa olsun,bilimci, bilimci olmayı Çok İsteyen Kişidir!
- Çocukluktaki karanlık korkusunu doğada bir ışık yakarak yenmek ...
- Ph.D ünvanı dünyanın hemen her akademik kurul için yeterli bir pasaporttur
- Önemli buluşlar yapmak isteyen bilimci, önemli problemler üzerinde çalışmalıdır.
- Bir araştırmacı, doktoradan sonra doktora konusunda çalışmayı hiçbir nedenle ömür boyu sürdürmemelidir.
- Kitap öğretisine aşırı bağımlılık, hayal gücünü sınırlayıcı etki yapar.
- Araştırmada ilerlemenin en iyi yolu, kitaplıklara kapanmak değil, onunla sahada uğraşmaktır.
- Enerjik,adanmış,çalışkan,sağduyulu,etik, ihtiyatlı, kuşkucu ve paylaşımcı olmak..
- Çokbilmişlik yalnız 'incinmiş bir ruh'a devadır.
- Bilimde iş birliği, ruh cömertliği gerektirir.
- Kapısını kapalı tutan kişinin dışarı çıkacak şeylerden çok, girecek olanları önlediği rivayet edilir.
- Çalışkan hiçbir bilimci kendisini yaşlanmış hissetmez. Amacı uğrunda her sabah yeniden doğmuş gibi hisseder.
- Muzaffer Roma İmparatoru da fanidir..
- Yazmayı öğrenmek için her şeyden önce okumak (Bernard Shaw tümceleri önerilmiş), iyi örnekleri incelemek ve araştırma yapmak Şarttır.
- Prensipte doğrulama yerine prensipte yanlışlama (falsifiability in principle) ve ters hipotez önerilir...
- Pasteur; Talih sadece oyunu iyi oynayanların yüzüne güler!!

[ilgim · Rating 4 out of 5]

Je cherche à comprendre! ve gerçeği arıyorum.

"Bir grup olarak bilimciler akılcıdırlar; hiç olmazsa daha dar anlamı ile, bir nedenin gerekliliğine çekincesiz olarak inanma anlamında akılcıdırlar. Bu konuda herhangi bir sapmaları olduğunu ima etmek onların şaşkınlık ve öfkelerine neden olur. Akılcılık bir mesleki yükü, modern mantıksızlık modasına karşı savaşmak gereğini de beraberinde getirir; yalnızca kaşık bükmeye veya onun felsefi eşdeğerlerine karşı savaşmak değil, asıl şimdiye kadar dünyanın bütün büyük düşünürlerinin yeterli bulduğu suradan muhakeme yolu yerine "rapsodik" idrakı getirmeye yönelen mantıksızlığa karşı savaşmak."

Özellikle sayfa 60-82de yer alan 7. ve 8. bölümü tüm genç bilimcilerin okuması gerektiğine inanıyorum.

Sir Medawar, 1960 Nobel Ödülü sahibi inanılmaz bir biyolog ve zamanında yol gösterilme yoksunluğunu başka bir öğrenci tatmasın diye herhangi bir akıl hocası olmayan cevherlere kılavuz olmayı hedeflemiş. İçinde vizyon genişleten birçok öneri ve örnekleme ile oldukça kıymetli bir rehber sunmuş. Kibrin, şovenizmin, ayrımcılığın ve mantıksızlığın bilim dünyasına ait olmamasının yanı sıra tutkunun, tekrarın, deney tarzının, etik görüşün önemini de vurgulamış.

Başlığın Türkçeye "Genç Bilimciye Öğütler" olarak çevrilmesi gerekirdi çünkü kitapta tam olarak bilimcilik sanatı yanlısı (scientman) bireylerin, hakikati hakkıyla arayan bilimciler (scientist) karşısında güçlü bir kritiği söz konusu. Ayrıca cinsiyet eşitliğine de değinilmiş olmasına rağmen başlıkta "bilimadamı" tercihinin yapılması içerikten tamamıyla kopuk bir düzenleme hatası gibi duruyor. Sonu bir yere gitmeyen sıfat tamlamaları, bağlamı bir mantığa varmayan cümleler ve dilimizde karşılığı olmayan kelimeler sıklıkla kullanılmış. Bu örgüde okumak rahatsız edici ve orijinalinde verilmek istenen mesajı dil kusurlarını göz ardı ederek anlamaya çalışmak yorucu olsa da, kitabın etkili bir danışman olduğu aşikar.

"Bilimciler umutlu olsalar da onları 'optimist' olarak nitelemek felsefi bir hata olur. Çünkü eğer optimist olurlarsa var olma nedenlerinin çoğu yok olur."

Canım babamın anısına.

[William Smith · Rating 3 out of 5]

Medawar advocates a young scientist to inspirit the role of scientific meliorism: the world can and should be improved through their insights and skills. Throughout, Medawar bestows the distilled wisdom that research neophytes accept the candid challenge of scientific inquisition with unbreakable enthusiasm, humility instead of egotistical prowess, and embosom the role of opportunity and chance in success as remarked by Fontenelle:

‘Ces hasards ne sont que pour ceux quijouent bien!’
(‘These strokes of good fortune are only for those who play well!’)

In short, this work acts as a series of transient transitions between snapshots of the scientific landscape, bureaucracy to the symphony, including Medawar’s estimations of the racial and sexual panorama amongst scientists, the distinctions between public and private perceptions of a research’s life, and, most importantly, the undercurrents of the researcher’s mind. Coy caution of the limits of rationalism is brought to the foreground casting dust on more prominent scientists (Dawkins) who argue of the baleful bemusing being of ‘why’ prompted questions. With such a contrarian idea, this Nobel prize winner attentively arrows admonitions towards those who may claim the supreme omniscience of science to cleanse doubt, particularly insofar as it relates to the meaning of being. In his own words:

‘Young scientists must however never be tempted into mistaking the necessity of reason for the sufficiency of reason. Rationalism falls short of answering the many simple and childlike questions people like to ask: questions about origins and purposes such as are often contemptuously dismissed as nonquestions or pseudoquestions, although people understand them clearly enough and long to have the answers.’

[Thabs · Rating 3 out of 5]

In the preface, Medawar explains away his consistent use of male pronouns throughout the book. Apparently, he is disappointed over the English language not having any epicene pronouns which he could use to gender-neutralise the descriptions in his text. Has the man conveniently forgotten about the singular use of "they"?

Either way, this book is chock-full of very helpful advice for students and postdocs. Medawar provides guidance on choosing topics for research, preparing for a career in science, presenting one’s work, and applying the scientific method judiciously.

Twice in my life I have spent two weary and scientifically profitless years seeking evidence to corroborate dearly loved hypotheses that later provided to be groundless; times such as these are hard for scientists—days of leaden gray skies bringing with them a miserable sense of oppression and inadequacy.

Medawar also offers excellent advice for those who doubt their eligibility for work in research. In what seems unexpected given his choice to maintain use of masculine English pronouns, Medawar eagerly debunks myths concerning ‘natural ability’ associated with gender.

The idea that women are, and are to be expected to be, constitutionally different from men in scientific ability is a cozy domestic form of racism.

He even extends this concept of ‘racism’ to the fallacy that nationality or ethnic grouping yields special intellectual gifts. Certainly not the white scientific patriarch one may have anticipated after reading the preface. This brief and occasionally witty collection of wise takes from a successful medical researcher is rather essential reading for the starter scientist looking for guidance and motivation to press on in their field.

[Maritere Domínguez · Rating 3 out of 5]

"Los científicos son personas de temperamentos muy distintos... Entre los hombres de ciencia hay recolectores, clasificadores y limpiadores compulsivos, muchos son detectives por temperamento y muchos son exploradores; algunos son artistas, otros artesanos ... ¿Qué clase de mentalidad o temperamento puede suponerse que todos ellos tienen en común? Los científicos por obligación son muy raros, y la mayoría de quienes en realidad son científicos fácilmente habrían podido ser también otra cosa"

"Un joven científico no debe desalentarse si no llega a ser epónimo de un principio natural, un fenómeno, o una enfermedad. Ninguno necesita pensar que conseguirá una gran reputación o gran preferencia tan solo compilando información del tipo que realmente a nadie le importa. Pero si hace que el mundo sea más fácilmente comprensible por algún medio - ya sea teórico o experimental - se ganará la gratitud y el respeto de sus colegas"

"La buena suerte casi siempre va precedida por una expectativa,a la que gratificará."

"El método científico, cómo a veces se lo llama,es una potenciación del sentido común. "

"La crítica es el arma más poderosa de toda metodología de las ciencias; es la única seguridad que tiene el científico de que no persistirá en el error. Si un experimento no apoya la posibilidad de hacer que alguien revise sus propias ideas, resulta difícil ver por qué habremos de hacerlo, para empezar"

Aunque ya se lee un poco atrasado para la época, muchas situaciones siguen siendo relevantes, cómo la competencia entre equipos de trabajo.

[Riina · Rating 3 out of 5]

Teos ei kaikilta osin ole enää nykyään päivän polttavissa asioissa kiinni. Monikaan tieteentekijä tuskin julkisesti arvioisi naiskollegojaan näiden väitteellisesti sukupuoleen liittyvien synnynnäisten tekijöiden perusteella - toisin kuin 1970-luvulla, jolloin luonnontieteessä Medawarin epätieteellisiksi kritisoimat tällaiset oletukset olivat jopa tyypillisiä.

Kuitenkin pääosa teoksesta on edelleen yhtä ajankohtaista kuin 50 vuotta sittenkin: ota selvää käyttämiesi teorioiden ja käsitteiden muotoutumisesta nykyiseen muotoonsa. Lue runsaasti, mutta älä viivytelläksesi tutkimuksen aloittamista. Käyttäydy vanhempia kollegoja kohtaan arvostavasti, mutta älä nuoleskele vaan anna kohteliasta kritiikkiä silloin kun se on perusteltua. Jos seuraat luentoa, älä torku vaan mieti, millaisen kysymyksen voisit esittää sen päätteeksi, jotta joudut pureskelemaan esityksen sisältöä.

Pituuteensa nähden erittäin tiivis ja välillä hyvinkin viihdyttävä teos (luonnon)tieteellisen uran eduista, karikoista - ja käytännön työstä.

[Asuman Ovalı]

Lise ve üniversite öğrencilerinin okumasında fayda var. Herhangi bir konuda bize öğüt verildiğinde içten içe zaten bunu bildiğimizi düşünürüz. Ancak öğütleri başkasının dilinden dinlemeye ihtiyacımız vardır. Bu kitap da onu sağlıyor. Sağduyu, tecrübe ve birikimle harmanlanmış tespitleri (siz zaten çoğunu bilseniz de), değerli bir bilim adamının cümlelerinden okumak fırsatı veriyor. Ancak kimi bölümlerin anlaşılması zor gelebilir. Bunun tercümeden kaynaklandığını düşünüyorum. Türkçe tercümesini beğenmedim. Yazarın üslubu, içeriğin yoğunluğu tercümeyi zorlaştırmış olabilir ama bu durumun üstesinden gelinebilirdi. Üstünkörü, yeterince çalışılmamış ve okumayı zorlaştıran bir çeviri olduğu izlenimi edindim.

[Isto R. Eipäs · Rating 4 out of 5]

Loisto kirja tiedemaailmasta ja tieteen tekemisestä.

Termistön kannalta kohderyhmä on selvä: toisen vuoden tohtoriopiskelija tai post doc, ehkäpä muisteloitaan hihittelevä professori. Toki myös tutkijaa ymmärtääkseen lukevat, tosin silloin lukijalta vaaditaan vähän enemmän mielikuvitusta tai ennakkotietoja esim. seminaarien luonteesta ja akateemisesta maailmasta.

Teos purkaa myös boheemin taiteilijan kaltaista, yhtä iskostunutta stereotypiaa, harmaan tiedemiehen trooppia, ja paljastaa sen alta yhtä intohimoisen ja inhimillisen ihmisryhmän. "Jos tiedemies leikkaisi korvansa irti, sitä ei tulkittaisi luovuuden onnettoman tuskan merkiksi".

[Edd Marbello-Santrich · Rating 5 out of 5]

As a any human activity, science carries severals features out with it. The good ones —the majority, I think— are certainly the constant search of truth, curiosity, room for anything you can ask in a formal stage as well as an unifying language where everyone who defends these principles, is welcome to work at conferences (trips around the world, oh yeah!), papers, lectures and the like. On the other hand, as everything, there are people with so high egos, gender discrimination, a lack of social human life —does it really matter? Well, maybe inside your family—, and so many struggels. Well, it is not boring in advance, isn't it? We could find the best tastes, feelings or discoveries in the world. Starting from the smallest stuff, such as electrons, hellicoydal structures and microorganisms, passing through the most beautiful creatures and their behaviours, arriving in the search of the other forms of life, the dynamics of the unkown universe thanks to awesomes devices built from the inner activity who we are saying in this review, or maybe just as a personal work. All of them are worth. All you need is start to say: What if...? Once you do it, there are no chance to get bored.

[Debby Ng · Rating 5 out of 5]

Essential reading for anyone curious about science, scientists, and how to approach questions in our natural world.

"Although the importance of discoveries may be overrated, no young scientist need think that he will gain reputation or high preferment merely by compiling information - particularly information of the kind nobody really wants. But if he makes the world more easily understandable - he will earn his colleagues' gratitude and respect."

[Jithin Sam · Rating 5 out of 5]

A relatively older book that is still relevant on the meaning of academic pursuit and scientific study in the life of scientists, those around them and the community they belong to.

Very insightful is Ch 11 Pg 96 “Although the notion of cyclical recurrence of historical epochs has been abandoned, it is motivated still by dissatisfaction - especially with the world for which, as it is believed, ‘science is responsible’”.

[Estefanía Maximenco · Rating 4 out of 5]

Este libro proporciona una visión honesta del trabajo de los y las científicas a lo largo de los años. Yo, como una simple estudiante de ciencias físicas, le he podido sacar provecho y consejos, así que puedo decir que el libro cumplió su cometido. Tal vez le faltó un poco de contemplación hacia las mujeres en la ciencia como algo natural, pero por la época no puede esperarse otra cosa. Me encantó el acercamiento también a la parte espiritual de las personas y, por lo tanto, de los científicos.

[Tania Fabo · Rating 3 out of 5]

This book was okay. It had some good pearls of wisdom about what it means to do good science and generally navigating the weird world of science and all its quirks. However, a larger portion of it was Medawar's philosophical musings about science, its history, and its place in the world which I had a hard time connecting with.